To determine the best curriculum for students can be one of the first considerable works in nowadays schools. According to the topic, students should learn the same national curriculum rather than different academic courses assigned by local educational institutions.Although national curriculum are generally adopted in nowadays schools in China, people are suspicious about whether it is the best choice for students. In my point of view, it should allow schools in different areas free to choose the core curriculums as well as related materials.
Apparently, national curriculums provide local school students with standard courses and educational sources do help students develop necessary social skills. Yet, no one can randomly presume that fundamental education is qualified as long as students can acquire the basic necessary social skills. The main purpose of education is to enlighten people , to assist them becoming elaborative faculties, reinforce all kinds of social skills and pursue human liberation. However, the content of present national curriculums in China are so limited and fixed that it encourages students to mechanically memorize the knowedge rather than having a dialectic reflection on it.
My points of contention involve 3 negative repects of the homogenization of elementary education, as discussed below.
A unified curriculum set would easily established a subjective decision arrangement from small bunch of people, which might not be the best courses for different kinds of students with different background. Children in North Korea are asked to courses about "Basic Knowledge", such as: the demand of memoring their prime minister's name spelling , the requirement of greeting people with smile, the order of sitting in a regulated position ,etc. These kinds of national courses have been done for nothing but wasted students' lots of time and energy, which they could absolutely use to learn more useful knowledge like about the world or human races instead. Another typical example also shows that national curriculum are not the best ones for students. Women in Islam are all being taught to rely on men and be as an appendix to men when they are young. These national curriculum and courses have nothing to do with the development of intergrated personalities of women in Islam . In addition, as a token of ideology, the national curriculum will surely deliver certain belief and thoughts which undermine the neutrality of academia. Samurai education permeates into lifes of every male Japanese as a way to consolidate the tradition of serving the royalty.All the examples indicate that the policymakers select and arrange curriculum based on consolidating the dominance of ideology rather than the students utmost benefit.
A unified curriculum can undermine the core purpose of education, that is to enlighten human beings by equipping them with knowledge and ablity. As a proverb goes; 'The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one's mind a pleasant place in which to spend one's time.' Education asks for liberty, it produces citizens with independent minds and body to explore the world ; while under the education like unified courses, knowledge would be limited and people can hadly develop a free will, which has obstructed the essential approachs to the revolution of society-promoting by people who has free mind and will: Wallace fought for Scotland by the force of a free heart; Magellan circumnavigated the globe by the force of a free will; Stephen Hawking worked on the basic laws which govern the universe by the force of a free mind, etc. Therefore, educated by a uniform curriculum, a person can become nothing but a craftsman, a slave , or even loses the nobility of a free man.
In addition, the similarity of curricula can seriously decrease cultural diversity. A famous professor from The Birmingham School gives words that "Customs and subcultures are so distinct from each other that sometimes we can easily be ethnocentrism and forget the importance of diversity." In China, some regions inhabited by ethnic groups don't have their own previlege to teach the next generations about their our traditions and customs like other regions. They cannot even use their regional dialect for classroom expressions. It surely will be a disaster to the subcultures in these areas especially those rely on verbal communication.
In sum, the issue of arranging curriculum is so complex one that requiring much further researched for concrete terms in different areas. Thus, I think there is no standard of fixed curriculum arrangement. The best for students, the best curriculum arrangement.
Apparently, national curriculums provide local school students with standard courses and educational sources do help students develop necessary social skills. Yet, no one can randomly presume that fundamental education is qualified as long as students can acquire the basic necessary social skills. The main purpose of education is to enlighten people , to assist them becoming elaborative faculties, reinforce all kinds of social skills and pursue human liberation. However, the content of present national curriculums in China are so limited and fixed that it encourages students to mechanically memorize the knowedge rather than having a dialectic reflection on it.
My points of contention involve 3 negative repects of the homogenization of elementary education, as discussed below.
A unified curriculum set would easily established a subjective decision arrangement from small bunch of people, which might not be the best courses for different kinds of students with different background. Children in North Korea are asked to courses about "Basic Knowledge", such as: the demand of memoring their prime minister's name spelling , the requirement of greeting people with smile, the order of sitting in a regulated position ,etc. These kinds of national courses have been done for nothing but wasted students' lots of time and energy, which they could absolutely use to learn more useful knowledge like about the world or human races instead. Another typical example also shows that national curriculum are not the best ones for students. Women in Islam are all being taught to rely on men and be as an appendix to men when they are young. These national curriculum and courses have nothing to do with the development of intergrated personalities of women in Islam . In addition, as a token of ideology, the national curriculum will surely deliver certain belief and thoughts which undermine the neutrality of academia. Samurai education permeates into lifes of every male Japanese as a way to consolidate the tradition of serving the royalty.All the examples indicate that the policymakers select and arrange curriculum based on consolidating the dominance of ideology rather than the students utmost benefit.
A unified curriculum can undermine the core purpose of education, that is to enlighten human beings by equipping them with knowledge and ablity. As a proverb goes; 'The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one's mind a pleasant place in which to spend one's time.' Education asks for liberty, it produces citizens with independent minds and body to explore the world ; while under the education like unified courses, knowledge would be limited and people can hadly develop a free will, which has obstructed the essential approachs to the revolution of society-promoting by people who has free mind and will: Wallace fought for Scotland by the force of a free heart; Magellan circumnavigated the globe by the force of a free will; Stephen Hawking worked on the basic laws which govern the universe by the force of a free mind, etc. Therefore, educated by a uniform curriculum, a person can become nothing but a craftsman, a slave , or even loses the nobility of a free man.
In addition, the similarity of curricula can seriously decrease cultural diversity. A famous professor from The Birmingham School gives words that "Customs and subcultures are so distinct from each other that sometimes we can easily be ethnocentrism and forget the importance of diversity." In China, some regions inhabited by ethnic groups don't have their own previlege to teach the next generations about their our traditions and customs like other regions. They cannot even use their regional dialect for classroom expressions. It surely will be a disaster to the subcultures in these areas especially those rely on verbal communication.
In sum, the issue of arranging curriculum is so complex one that requiring much further researched for concrete terms in different areas. Thus, I think there is no standard of fixed curriculum arrangement. The best for students, the best curriculum arrangement.
